| Author |
Message |
|
Taro Akag
#1 / 16
|
 Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Hello.
The Microsoft VB manuals are very obscure regarding the
compiling of a 32-bit project into a 16-bit executable. I need
to create the 16-bit executable 'cos a few folks at my
company need to be able to run my application on Windows 3.1.
I don't want to have to install win32s for every one of those
computers.
Can someone help me out?
|
| Fri, 04 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
 |
|
Patrick Lor
#2 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
>Hello.
> The Microsoft VB manuals are very obscure regarding the
>compiling of a 32-bit project into a 16-bit executable. I need
>to create the 16-bit executable 'cos a few folks at my
>company need to be able to run my application on Windows 3.1.
>I don't want to have to install win32s for every one of those
>computers.
> Can someone help me out?
VB 4.0 Pro and Enterprise come with two complete versions, 16-bit and 32-bit. You must install both versions if you wish to create both 16 and 32 bit applications. ----------------------------------------------
TimeShare Computer Systems
iNETech, Inc.
|
| Fri, 04 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Dale Co
#3 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Taro
To compile a 16bit exacutable you need to have the 16bit version of VB4, which
should have come with your 32bit version. You have to load your 32bit code into
the 16bit version of VB4 and recompile it.
The source code itself shouldn't be a problem (no difference between 32bit and
16bit, but whatch out for type definitions), but you have to remember to change
any Win32 API calls you make (if you make any) to Win16 API calls.
Dale
Quote: >...
> The Microsoft VB manuals are very obscure regarding the
>compiling of a 32-bit project into a 16-bit executable. I need
>to create the 16-bit executable 'cos a few folks at my
>company need to be able to run my application on Windows 3.1.
>I don't want to have to install win32s for every one of those
>computers.
>...
|
| Sat, 05 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Helge Sü
#4 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
>Hello.
> The Microsoft VB manuals are very obscure regarding the
>compiling of a 32-bit project into a 16-bit executable. I need
>to create the 16-bit executable 'cos a few folks at my
>company need to be able to run my application on Windows 3.1.
>I don't want to have to install win32s for every one of those
>computers.
First of all you'll need the VB Pro or Enterprise. The Standard Ed. doesn't support 16bit. You'll have to install it and create the EXE from there. If you use API calls you have to use a compile time if statement to have the 16/32bit declarations valid in the right environment. I've seen this in a few articles I passed by in hte VB KB at www.microsoft.com. #If Win32 Then
' 32bit code
#Else
' 16bit code
#End If
All things that VB does should work if not stated 16 or 32bit only.
If you use some of the new controls -- troubles!
(although there are some 16bit replacements available)
Helge ;-)=)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) All Thoughts are Mine, Genuine Genius
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| Sun, 06 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Joe Garri
#5 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
>#If Win32 Then
>' 32bit code
>#Else
>' 16bit code
>#End If
Also remember that lots of data types have changed. For example, handles to most everything are now long rather integer, so you have to conditionally compile not only the function calls, but the data declarations as well. Joe
Never underestimate the power of a WAG.
http://www.citilink.com/~jgarrick
|
| Tue, 08 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Robert Geragh
#6 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
> The Microsoft VB manuals are very obscure regarding the
>compiling of a 32-bit project into a 16-bit executable. I need
>to create the 16-bit executable 'cos a few folks at my
>company need to be able to run my application on Windows 3.1.
Hopefully there is another answer to this other than installing a second copy of VB4.0 as a 16bit install. That is the only solution I've heard so far. Quote: >I don't want to have to install win32s for every one of those
>computers.
VB4.0 apps compiled as 32bit applications won't run under Win32s. (at least according to what I've been able to find) Rob
--
"Anywhere you go, let me go too...
Christine, That's all I ask of you..."
|
| Sat, 19 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Robert Geragh
#7 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
>Hopefully there is another answer to this other than installing a second
>copy of VB4.0 as a 16bit install. That is the only solution I've heard
>so far.
Having now tried this method, it didn't work for me. The app ran fine on my Windows 95 PC when compiled under the 16bit install of VB4.0, but wouldn't run on anything else. I tried using the installation wizard to create an install package including all the required DLLs etc but this crashed on a Win3.11 machine which then had to have Windows reinstalled. The install also blew out from a sub-1MB VB3 application to an 8MB monster. I guess I'm not impressed thus far with the useability of VB40 16 bit. :-P
Rob
--
"Anywhere you go, let me go too...
Christine, That's all I ask of you..."
|
| Sat, 19 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Joe Garri
#8 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
>Hopefully there is another answer to this other than installing a second
>copy of VB4.0 as a 16bit install. That is the only solution I've heard
>so far.
That's the only solution there is. You need VB4 16-bit installed to create a 16-bit .exe. Quote: >>I don't want to have to install win32s for every one of those
>>computers.
>VB4.0 apps compiled as 32bit applications won't run under Win32s.
>(at least according to what I've been able to find)
That's correct. They won't. Joe
Never underestimate the power of a WAG.
http://www.citilink.com/~jgarrick
|
| Mon, 21 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Robert Geragh
#9 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
>>Hopefully there is another answer to this other than installing a second
>>copy of VB4.0 as a 16bit install. That is the only solution I've heard
>>so far.
>That's the only solution there is. You need VB4 16-bit installed
>to create a 16-bit .exe.
This strikes me as an idiotic design. Why should I have to have an entire system installed when all I want is to change the library links and calls to create a different EXE? I guess it was a simple solution for Micro$oft but it isn't a user-friendly solution. That aside, I tried recompiling a VB4 project which was working happily
under Win95 and it wouldn't run in Win3.11 - aside from the fact that
the install kit for the 16bit version was several megabytes for a very
simple program.
(and the setup wizard screwed up the 3.11 machine as well)
Maybe I was just unlucky - I'd like to hear stories of success!
Rob
--
"Anywhere you go, let me go too...
Christine, That's all I ask of you..."
|
| Wed, 23 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Richard RUDE
#10 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
> >>Hopefully there is another answer to this other than installing a second
> >>copy of VB4.0 as a 16bit install. That is the only solution I've heard
> >>so far.
> >That's the only solution there is. You need VB4 16-bit installed
> >to create a 16-bit .exe.
> This strikes me as an idiotic design. Why should I have to have an
> entire system installed when all I want is to change the library links
> and calls to create a different EXE? I guess it was a simple solution
> for Micro$oft but it isn't a user-friendly solution.
> That aside, I tried recompiling a VB4 project which was working happily
> under Win95 and it wouldn't run in Win3.11 - aside from the fact that
> the install kit for the 16bit version was several megabytes for a very
> simple program.
> (and the setup wizard screwed up the 3.11 machine as well)
> Maybe I was just unlucky - I'd like to hear stories of success!
> Rob
> --
> "Anywhere you go, let me go too...
> Christine, That's all I ask of you..."
Fast Food Development tools. "Geeze, you listend when I said you need 32MB, 1GB, Pentium etc.
So, why can't you have two Computers..."
Psuedo Microsoft Employee..
--
_____ _____ ___________________________________
| _ \ | _ \ | |
| |_) | | |_) | | Richard RUDEK. | Sometimes,
| _ / | _ / | MicroDek. Chatswood, Sydney. | advice is worth
| | \ \ | | \ \ | Australia (The Social Experiment).| what you spend.
|_| \_||_| \_||___________________________________|
|
| Fri, 25 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Joe Garri
#11 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
>>That's the only solution there is. You need VB4 16-bit installed >>to create a 16-bit .exe. >This strikes me as an idiotic design. Why should I have to have an
>entire system installed when all I want is to change the library links
>and calls to create a different EXE? I guess it was a simple solution
>for Micro$oft but it isn't a user-friendly solution.
You're right. It does seem pretty awful. As far as I know, VB is the only programming product that can target mutliple platforms but forces you to use a different version for each. I hate to image what things will be like if VB ever supports the Mac or any other os. Joe
Never underestimate the power of a WAG.
http://www.citilink.com/~jgarrick
|
| Thu, 31 Dec 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Paul Sampso
#12 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
> >>That's the only solution there is. You need VB4 16-bit installed
> >>to create a 16-bit .exe.
> >This strikes me as an idiotic design. Why should I have to have an
> >entire system installed when all I want is to change the library links
> >and calls to create a different EXE? I guess it was a simple solution
> >for Micro$oft but it isn't a user-friendly solution.
> You're right. It does seem pretty awful. As far as I know, VB is
> the only programming product that can target mutliple platforms
> but forces you to use a different version for each. I hate to
> image what things will be like if VB ever supports the Mac or any
> other os.
Visual C++ is the same. You can still produce 16 bit apps with MSVC 1.52, a still - barely - active product which'll run in a 32 bit environment but which is, of course, different from the 32 bit version. However, I feel that it might be helpful to point out that, in the case of
VB4 anyway, it is quite possible to install VB4-32 'on top of' VB4-16, same
application directories and all that. And they'll both run quite happily as
the second installation won't damage the first. So it's not as if you need
twice as much diskage - the bulk of VB is identical in both archies.
[ >8 ]
--
Vox (0|+44)1642 216 200 | | | Zetland Buildings, Exchange Square
Fax (0|+44)1642 216 201 O O * Middlesbrough, Cleveland. TS1 1DE
|
| Sat, 02 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Robert Geragh
#13 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
>However, I feel that it might be helpful to point out that, in the case of
>VB4 anyway, it is quite possible to install VB4-32 'on top of' VB4-16, same
>application directories and all that. And they'll both run quite happily as
>the second installation won't damage the first. So it's not as if you need
>twice as much diskage - the bulk of VB is identical in both archies.
That *is* useful to know. Pity the manual doesn't mention it. :( Rob
--
"Anywhere you go, let me go too...
Christine, That's all I ask of you..."
|
| Mon, 04 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Robert Geragh
#14 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
>>entire system installed when all I want is to change the library links
>>and calls to create a different EXE? I guess it was a simple solution
>>for Micro$oft but it isn't a user-friendly solution.
>You're right. It does seem pretty awful. As far as I know, VB is
>the only programming product that can target mutliple platforms
>but forces you to use a different version for each.
I'm told Borland has products (not VB obviously) which compile into 16 or 32bit platforms at the change of a flag. Why not VB? :-P Quote: >I hate to image what things will be like if VB ever supports the Mac or any
>other os.
Scary thought! Rob
--
"Anywhere you go, let me go too...
Christine, That's all I ask of you..."
|
| Mon, 04 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Joe Garri
#15 / 16
|
Compiling a 16-bit executable using 32-bit VB. Quote:
>>the only programming product that can target mutliple platforms >>but forces you to use a different version for each. >I'm told Borland has products (not VB obviously) which compile into 16 or
>32bit platforms at the change of a flag. Why not VB? :-P
I always thought that was how it was *supposed* to work. It eludes me as to why you should need to be running a 16-bit version of VB in order to compile a 16-bit .exe. The only reason that makes sense is that MS didn't want to have to generate 32-bit code for the 16-bit .exe compiler. Joe
Never underestimate the power of a WAG.
http://www.citilink.com/~jgarrick
|
| Fri, 15 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT |
|
| |
